Guest Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 I think that SONY knew exactly what would happen and counted on the indignation of North Korea to stimulate interest in the movie. Greed got them to where there are now. They won't make a dime. They should just post it on YouTube so everyone who wants to waste their time can watch it. I applaud the theaters for not showing it, as it has the potential to expose movie goers to terrorism. And no, the authorities can't protect us from home grown/embedded terrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Patriot21 Posted December 21, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 28 Topic Count: 338 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 15,710 Content Per Day: 2.45 Reputation: 8,526 Days Won: 39 Joined: 10/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/27/1985 Share Posted December 21, 2014 the movie itself, looks despicable, and in bad taste, but with that sad, in principle, I think its stupid they pulled it because of all the threats. I think the threats were stupid. Whatever happened to doing things the civil way-if people didnt like something they boycotted it. Peaceful, but it hit the companies in the pocketbook-I watched one such boycott work against disney back when I was in highschool. Now, instead of pulling peaceful protests over things people dont like they call in death threats and burn down towns. If I was sony Id release it out of spite, just to prove they can't be bullied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmuffet Posted December 21, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,992 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,690 Content Per Day: 11.79 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted December 21, 2014 I kind of see both sides of this. On the one hand, we should not be running scared of N. Korea of places. But if the decision was made to run the screen the films and disregard the warnings, and even just one bomb went off in one theater, wouldn't Sony and the theater company that screened the film be castigated for ignoring the warnings? I mean, it seems to me that this might be a no win situation for Sony and the theaters. They are accused of cowardice if they don't show the film but might be accused of reckless endangerment if they released it and there was a terror attack on a theater that screened it. Better to be safe than sorry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffeespiller87 Posted December 21, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 212 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 1,691 Content Per Day: 0.31 Reputation: 449 Days Won: 1 Joined: 03/28/2009 Status: Offline Share Posted December 21, 2014 I agree that the movie The Interview shouldn't have even been made. Making a film about that is so disrespectful. I don't agree with the dictator of North Korea and Im not defending his actions. But I feel like a movie like this will only do harm and not produce anything beneficial. I will not waste my time or money on a film of such poor taste. I think they are pulling the film because they do not want to risk people's lives over a film. It isnt worth showing if their is a chance a ton of people could lose their life's over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphaparticle Posted December 22, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,363 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 403 Days Won: 5 Joined: 08/01/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted December 22, 2014 Kowtowing to some little despot... it is unfortunate. Making a movie about the North Korean dictator is not comparable to one about Obama. However poor a politician you may find Obama to be (and I agree he is a poor politician), he is not a ruthless dictator with blood directly on his hands. Such a person should not be favorably compared in any way to more or less 'respectable' world leaders. It is right to mock this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_S Posted December 22, 2014 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 0.99 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted December 22, 2014 I kind of see both sides of this. On the one hand, we should not be running scared of N. Korea of places. But if the decision was made to run the screen the films and disregard the warnings, and even just one bomb went off in one theater, wouldn't Sony and the theater company that screened the film be castigated for ignoring the warnings? I mean, it seems to me that this might be a no win situation for Sony and the theaters. They are accused of cowardice if they don't show the film but might be accused of reckless endangerment if they released it and there was a terror attack on a theater that screened it. They may be castigated, but I sort of doubt it, in general. A bomb going off in a theater where that movie was playing would be viewed by most reasonable or even semi-reasonable people as a legitimate act of war against the US by North Korea. If we start allowing the leaders of other nations to dictate what can and cannot be done on our soil, there is no sense in even having a defense budget. This specific sort of thing should be the reason we spend nearly a trillion dollars a year on defense, defending attacks on our citizens by people like lil' kim. Simply put, this guy's ego was hurt and he threatened acts of war against the US for it. Capitulation in a situation like this will only encourage further sorts of statements like these from these sorts of people. Sony probably created more problems than it solved with its decision. I understand that they are a corporation and have no way of handling threats such as that, etc., but as soon as those threats came out it should've been made glaringly clear to North Korea, by our government, that any action taken against our citizens along the lines of the threats they made would be revisited upon their regime, military, and country with a catastrophically overwhelming amount of force, not with a proportional response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamnot Posted December 22, 2014 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 221 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 64 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/23/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/21/1945 Share Posted December 22, 2014 There is an old saying: "A malignant aggressor, figuratively speaking, probes with the bayonet, when it encounters steel it retreats; when it encounters mush, it advances and continues to encroach." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Patriot21 Posted December 22, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 28 Topic Count: 338 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 15,710 Content Per Day: 2.45 Reputation: 8,526 Days Won: 39 Joined: 10/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/27/1985 Share Posted December 22, 2014 a wise man once said, speak softly and carry a big stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamnot Posted December 22, 2014 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 221 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 64 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/23/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/21/1945 Share Posted December 22, 2014 That was Theodore Roosevelt's motto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Patriot21 Posted December 22, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 28 Topic Count: 338 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 15,710 Content Per Day: 2.45 Reputation: 8,526 Days Won: 39 Joined: 10/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/27/1985 Share Posted December 22, 2014 That was Theodore Roosevelt's motto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts